PSU board must embrace reforms

For those who love Penn State, the past year has been filled with sadness, shock and confusion. Jerry Sandusky's crimes, and the media's response, shook the university to the core. Firm, thoughtful and sensitive leadership is required at such times of crisis, and, tragically, this is not what happened at Penn State.

As the Penn State board of trustees struggled to manage the events surrounding Sandusky's arrest, we saw dysfunction. We saw a secretive, powerful group keeping the full board in the dark on matters as important as Sandusky's impending arrest and negotiations with the NCAA.

Communication was thoroughly bungled; Penn State is now used as a case study for the worst public relations disaster ever. The board paid an exorbitant fee for an investigation, and then repeatedly changed its stance; at different times, they said they took responsibility for all conclusions of the report, would not review it, had not formally accepted it, would consider implementing some of it, and commissioned it for a different reason entirely than the purpose they originally stated.

Urged to conduct its business with greater transparency, the board has failed to produce the documents that commissioned the investigation, and last month refused to answer questions at the public question-and-answer session it devised to enhance community relations. The board has repeatedly acted in the absence of complete information. The costs to our world-class university - in dollars and in loss of reputation - have been enormous, and continue to mount. The inescapable conclusion is that the Penn State board of trustees is broken.

Pennsylvania Auditor General Jack Wagner understood this, and embarked upon a careful study of best practices in governance among public universities. In November, he released a series of recommendations to reform the Penn State board. The process for developing the recommendations was open and inclusive. A grass-roots group of friends and alumni of Penn State, Penn Staters Reforming the Board of Trustees, conducted exhaustive research on governance at 63 comparable universities, and presented the results and its recommendations to Wagner. The board was informed last summer that this work was under way, and had ample opportunity to participate - but it opted out.

The recommendations are common-sense methods to modernize the way the board conducts its business: reducing the number of trustees to enhance efficiency, eliminating conflict of interest by removing as voting members the governor and the university president, implementing ethical protections so that the university's best interests are not sacrificed for personal gain.

Initial response from the board was dismissive, with one trustee saying that practices at other universities were irrelevant because Penn State is "unique" - a preposterous claim, given the careful research on comparable universities conducted by Wagner's office.

However, in their January meetings, the trustees began in earnest to consider the reforms, and announced plans to continue these efforts through the spring, with recommendations to be made to the full board in May. This is a very encouraging sign, indicating that the board is coming to grips with its own role in creating a healthy governance structure at Penn State.

Implementing the reforms will require legislative action as well. State Rep. Scott Conklin has announced his plans to introduce legislation that will implement Wagner's reforms.

Trustee Anthony Lubrano, a thoughtful critic of the board, has pledged his personal support.

These reforms deserve broad, overwhelming backing. As expressed in the auditor general's report: "Support for these reforms must come from all stakeholders speaking with one voice, including the General Assembly, the governor, Penn State's board and administration, university alumni, and - the most important stakeholder group of all - Pennsylvania taxpayers."

If there is a silver lining from the recent events at Penn State, it is that the deficiencies in the board of trustees have come to light. We now have the opportunity to make changes that will enable the board to lead the university effectively and responsively into the future.

Do we have the courage and will to put our own house in order?

We welcome user discussion on our site, under the following guidelines:

To comment you must first create a profile and sign-in with a verified DISQUS account or social network ID. Sign up here.

Comments in violation of the rules will be denied, and repeat violators will be banned. Please help police the community by flagging offensive comments for our moderators to review. By posting a comment, you agree to our full terms and conditions. Click here to read terms and conditions.

Think you have the cutest pet in NEPA? Share a photo of your furry companion and you could win prizes from our sponsors! Deadline to submit an entry is March 19, and voting will take place from March 20-March 31.